Guardian: Evaluating Trust in Online Social Networks with Graph Convolutional Networks
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In modern online social networks, each user is typically able to provide a value to indicate how trustworthy their direct friends are. Inferring such a value of social trust between any pair of nodes in online social networks is useful in a wide variety of applications, such as online marketing and recommendation systems. However, it is challenging to accurately and efficiently evaluate social trust between a pair of users in online social networks. Existing works either designed handcrafted rules that rely on specialized domain knowledge, or required a significant amount of computation resources, which affected their scalability.In recent years, graph convolutional neural networks (GCNs) have been shown to be powerful in learning on graph data. Their advantages provide great potential to trust evaluation as social trust can be represented as graph data. In this paper, we propose Guardian, a new end-to-end framework that learns latent factors in social trust with GCNs. Guardian is designed to incorporate social network structures and trust relationships to estimate social trust between any two users. Extensive experimental results demonstrated that Guardian can speedup trust evaluation by up to 2, 827 × with comparable accuracy, as compared to the stateof-the-art in the literature.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it